Following suit with most of Sigma's other lenses in its Global Vision lineup, the 70-200mm F2.8 DG OS HSM Sport lens comes in at a discount compared to its Canon and Nikon counterparts. Sigma has set the retail price at $1,499 USD, a full $600 cheaper than Canon's 70-200mm F2.8L IS III USM lens and exactly a thousand dollars cheaper than Nikon's 70-200mm f/2.8E FL ED VR lens.

The ones with Canon will be better served with Canon 70-200 2.8 II for the same money. Nikon already has great and cheaper Tamron G2 alternative. Nothing for Sony mount. Bummer. This is very bad because Sony 2.8 is too pricey and at the moment there is no native 2.8 alternative until in 2019 Tamron makes one. Sigma missed big opportunity to make money here.

Not sure if that will happen for three reasons:- they were reluctant to release the reflex-purposed ART primes, and only did so due to overwhelming demand.- they now have a mainstream mount of their own, and may privilege releases or mirrourless-purposed designs for the L mount.- the MC-11 already enables use of these zooms (and any ART lenses in SA or EF mount) on Sony FE

@StrangefinderGood points there. While Sony has E-mount protocols officially accessible for 3rd party to make lenses for it ,to make the best of it i guess you still need to collaborate with Sony. Something similar as per Sony with Tamron.

I don't know exactly what happen. Maybe Sigma did not bother to do business together with Sony or was simple denied to do so because Sony knows Sigma can make fantastic lenses. If Sigma have redesigned Art lenses with native no adapter glued on rear approach , people would not be paying extra for G or GM lenses but went with always better value Sigma. Obviously all is just pure speculation what im saying here.

Where is the L mount on these new lenses Sigma? Expected these to roll out within a few months of the announcement of the alliance but no evidence yet. Not even a hint of L mount in the future from them, to keep us Leica users interested.

Well for me if I was buying today I'd skip the new Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 and get the Tamron G2. Lighter, IQ and more than good enough just like any modern lens from the major players, excellent AF performance so close to the NIkon it's hair splitting, and cheaper than the Sigma. Plus the zoom ring turns the right way for NIkon. Of course the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8E lens is a non consideration for me due to the outrageous price. For the about same money as the Nikon 70-200 f/2.8E you can get two, just as good for real world photography, Tamron G2 f/2.8 zooms.

Yeah, the Tamron 70-200mm G2 is killer (love mine) and the warranty is 6 years. The Sigma warranty is 1 year with a 3 year extension for USA customers (customers in other regions might be stuck with 1 year). Just sayin'...

Pff you are talking hair splitting differences at best. Even a kit lens is good enough for a gallery quality print. Fact is IQ wise It really wont' mater for real photographs whether you take it with the Nikon lens, this Sigma lens, or the Tamron G2 lens.

sigma art series it great but falls short in auto-focus accuracy(i have 2 art lenses), i see tamaron lenses are much better in auto focus. It will be interested to see how well it stack up against its competitor.This focal range is mostly used by wedding/event/portrait photographers and auto-focus accuracy is paramount. Even with sigma USB dock it is hard to correct with zoom range.

I have the Tamron 70-200mm G2 for Nikon and it's awesome. AF is consistently spot on with no AF fine tune needed. But I tried the Tamron 45mm f1.8 and the AF was a complete disaster - inconsistent & not accurate even in bright conditions, and three times the lens just freaked out and wouldn't focus at all. I returned it for a refund. My point - I don't think it's possible to say all lenses from any one company are all great or not great. I also have the Sigma 135mm f1.8 and it's crazy sharp even wide open, but it needs AF fine tune of +7 with both of my cameras, and it's not so hot in low light conditions even with the AF assist beam from a flash... which is sorta weird considering how much light the lens gathers.

Looking at the B&H listing it is heavier then the Nikon and Tamron and is longer as well.I want lighter and smaller so not for me. Will stick with my Nikon F4 version for now. Hope the new Z version is smaller and lighter for my Z6.

For the Sports designation it might be sharp and all but it will not focus fast. And it weighs too much. As far as being Trio with 14-24mm and 24-70mm, 24-70mm doesn't even perform well unless Sigma will have V2 soon.

I have tested this lens at the Photokina and it focuses fast, just like many other modern Sigma lenses. The 24-70 focuses also fast, but wasn't sharp enough compared to the competition. The 14-24 is an excellent lens and better than all of it's competitors in many aspects.This 70-200 is sharp, fast, accurate and the stabilization works great, but... it's too heavy compared to the Canon, Nikon and Tamron 70-200's.

Except other modern Sigma lenses are NOT focusing fast. When it comes out test it against Tamron and you find out. And how do you know that new Sigma is sharp, OS works great and fast and accurate. Sigma did not allow taking pictures with it.

I shoot almost nothing but sports -- and I shoot various Sigma primes wide open, capturing fast-moving humans and objects. Zero concerns over autofocus speed. Zero. My technique? Yes, plenty of concerns with that. But the AF on these lenses in demanding real-world situations is just fine, thanks. Maybe I just got good samples of the lenses, every time.

SA-mount is basically EF-mount with a different shaped bayonet. Even the programming is the same. Takes very little extra work to produce it. And you can bet Sigma's new L-mount mirrorless will have an MC-11 of its own to be able to use SA-mount lenses.

Blue is right, at Photokina they stated that there'd be an adaptor for EF/SA ART/Sport (Global Vision) lenses to L mount, and that it'd have 100% compatibility (this time they write the protocols in collaboration with Leica and Panasonic). Leica also has adaptors for M and Cine lenses.

For Canon mount etc, they negotiate a licence, yet that is just for legal access - they still have to reverse engineer. This time they are equal partners in these technical respects - if something doesn't suit them, or they find a better way, they can update the protocol and Leica and Panasonic will issue firmware updates to assure compatibility.

The L mount lacks the physical constraints of the E mount as it was designed for full-frame sensors. This makes lenses potentially cheaper, smaller and better.

While no one has reviewed this lens to date, based on Sigma’s recent track record, I’ll assume that it will be a solid performer. I’m a professional sports shooter who until five years ago lived completely in the Nikon ecosystem. Now I’m struggling to justify the cost differences between the native brand lenses and the outstanding Tamron and Sigma offerings. I’ll probably buy this lens. I’ve been waiting for it. I am able but simply unwilling to pay $2500-2800 for the Nikon FL version. The cost-to-performance ratio between the lens brand has in many cases narrowed to the point where it’s hard to justify the signature brand. Long live Nikon! I’d like to support your brand. But foremost, I need to support my family.

Who cares in a way - they are both Japanese companies, so what's the difference? It's not as though you're choosing to buy a lens made in your country versus a foreign country, or a friendly country versus not-so-friendly country..

I tested this lens at the Photokina. It's a great lens, especially for it's price, but it ways quite a bit more than it's competitors. So if you don't mind the extra weight, this is a great lens. If you do mind: buy the brand 70-200 or the Tamron G2.

If the weight translates into durability and improved performance, I'm okay with that. I've seen my Canon 50mm f1.4 (which was nearly $500 at the time) in service and was horrified at the weak and crappy the plastic gears inside. The crappy build quality probably explains why those 50mm f1.4 lens barely make it to two years without service in an active photographer's bag (I liked the lens at the time, though I'd probably turn my nose up at its IQ now - wasn't usable for sharp photos until f2.2).

Well actually it is the failure of the A mount DSLRS that has led to Sony being the biggest player in FF mirrorless. See back in the day there was no reason to buy an A mount DSLR except to just be different. But if you didn't care about that Nikon and Canon had full lens lineups, were real camera companies not a johnny come lately consumer electronics company, and had a well established and proven track record for making quality, and reliable camera's and lenses.

Sony really had no chance to be competitive in that market. So they went with ASP-C mirrorless but found the market way too crowed to make much of a profit in it. They needed a niche they could get in on early and be the go to brand in. So they had one option left. Go all in with FF mirrorless and be first to pro level mirrorless bodies. This move saved their camera division most likely and is the reason Sony is now a recognized camera brand and a major player in the ILC market.

I'm waiting for their official announcement when it comes to "abandoning A mount." Until then, there is still hope that Sony can turn things around for the A mount! Like if the 60mp 8k camera happened to be the next A99... III! WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOTTTTTTTTT

"So they went with ASP-C mirrorless but found the market way too crowed to make much of a profit in it."

Huh? Sony beat Fuji and Canon to APS-C mirrorless by 2 years. And Canon was and still is non-competitive as far as performance and features. The no-selling original EOS M had to be tossed into a fire sale at great loss to get rid of. The M2 was nearly the same thing, with limited release, and only with the M3 (2015) did Canon finally start to head in a different direction. It took Fuji till 2016 to actually become competitive with Sony.

Sony went FF in 2013, long before it saw competition in APS-C. 2014's A6000 is the best selling mirrorless camera of all time, and continually takes up multiple spots in the top 10 and beyond of Amazon's top 100 selling mirrorless cameras to this day:

I think nearly all 70-200 and 80-200 F/2.8s (and probably F/4s) are. And in reverse, mostl 24-70 F/2.8s extend to zoom. Probably has to do with the optical design and location of the focusing elements (central in 70-200, up front in 24-70).

@CanonSharp-fan boy: You mean like the 3 stops of vignetting on the new 50/1.2 for EOS R? Compared to the Canon gear I had (one exception, 35/1.4ii) my Sony lenses are excellent. I must have been lucky.

"People who care about their clients would never play Sony games" - in what Canon store did You hear that?) In my city the majority of top photographers left Canon and Nikon and successfully works with Sony cameras and Sony high quality lenses.

“In my city the majority of top photographers left Canon” I’m not too sure which city you’re from, but in the big cities that have a professional sports team NO one is leaving Canon for Sony! This great migration is really only playing out on these Internet forums with key board warriors. While in the real world NO one is leaving Canon for Sony!

I don't talk about sport photographers. Let them shoot with their Canons. For portraiture, wedding and family photography Sony is much better choice. But brainwashed fan-boys like You can think that Your Canon is still №1 for absolutely every kind of photography.

@Canon-guy. There are quite a few who switched form dslrs to Sony. I just recently read about Bob Martin, Mine Kasapoglu, Yonathan Kellerman, Stefan Haworth, Gene Lower, Nick Didlick.In other areas many switched, esp. for weddings. I know quite a few. We switched too.

The only thing which stinks about Canon is how they handle video on their "low end" DSLR and mirrorless cameras. No usable 4K, line skipping instead of oversampling, no IBIS.

If you forget about video functionality in Canon still cameras (just forget it exists), they are damn fine photographic tools. I've got a Sony A6300 and a stabilised 35mm f1.8 and 50mm f1.8 for video, along with some custom Sony microphones.

This way I have great stills and great video. If I have to travel really light and need video, the Sony gear offers adequate stills. Most of the time, I carry my 5DS R and my photos show it.

I was referring to the staple 24-70mm and 70-200mm lenses. Sigma's current 24-70mm Art doesn't hold up as well to the native offerings or even to the Tamron 24-70mm G2. Sigma's previous 70-200mm lenses weren't anything special either. Saying that, their 120-300mm Sport is very good and and I'm hoping this new lens will be more like their current telephoto zooms.

@Jonathan F/2: only the 24-70 of their Global Vision f/2.8 lenses isn't very good. Their 14-24 f/2.8 is far better than the competition. The 70-200 you're talking about, is an older lens and still okay for a nice price.

The ART 24-70mm suffered from high-expectations. I understand that OIS was initially problematic, but the firmware resolved it - so that may have impacted early impressions, too.

The lens was given rendition as a design priority (i.e. bokeh and other character elements). For those that require something more exacting, there are numerous ART primes to choose from.

As I recall, it charts above the earlier round of standard zooms, it's just that those that released around the same time exceeded it at some lengths.

The way I see it, Sigma made sure that the lens exceeded certain levels yet without compromising beautiful character. Some people use the criticism of "clinical" for flawless lenses, so it may have been in response to that.

Were they protecting the ART primes, or had they licenced better designs to others? Perhaps, yet the line-up is extensive enough to afford a few variant design priorities from time to time.

I'm not surprised honestly that Canon managed an f2 zoom first. They have far more money to throw into R&D alone than Sigma has for its entire operations. Canon doesn't lack brilliant scientists and engineers capable of making great lenses. It's their management's lack of ambition and vision for the long term that's the real problem. The only reason it's taken Canon this long to come up with a 28-70 f2 is because they never needed to. Everyone was content with the status quo, and even Sigma's 24-35 f2 zoom felt like a novelty than a need.

Sigma on the other hand, being a small company knows that it can't survive making lenses that are no different from everybody else's. Hence with their Art lenses, they decided that absolute image quality is their primary focus. Tamron in comparison, is going for the opposite end: a target market that is willing to sacrifice some image quality for a balance of smaller, cheaper and lighter lens that's weather sealed and has in-lens stabilization.

You're right - in terms of scale it's not surprising. I don't track Canon very closely, but their low-oxygen releases generally make sound business sense for them, because many photographers (pro and novice) never concern themselves with technology unless a social shift compels them to. They know that Canon is the premier brand, so they get that and get to work never knowing that Fuji and Sigma exist.

The 28-70mm F/2 was a wise move as it effectively serves as advertising for the new system; the budget serves a double purpose. The contrast against their usual low-oxygen releases gives it greater mnemonic impact, too. I think that Nikon would have benefited from a similar tactic, but their resources are very constrained, and they needed to underprice the Z6 to contend with Sony.

My thoughts exactly. With the size of the FE primes they released, maybe they would offer a free back brace if the 70-200 f2.8 is bigger than those. Waiting for Tamron to come through. The 28-75 f2.8 is highly regarded on Sony's A7iii Facebook page. And rumor has it Tamron will be offering a 70 (ish) - 200 (ish) f2.8 for FE.

Tamron would be idiotic not to take advantage of the hole in the market for an affordable third-party 70-200 2.8 for FE. A7III was one of the top-cameras of 2018, they're selling like hotcakes in addition to that 28-75! The Tamron 28-75 may turn out to be one of the best-selling FE lenses of late and it's a third party lens! I think it's just a matter of time. Though, I am willing to wait for a better lens. What we don't need is a rushed-to-production lens that falls short.

Almost bought the 28-75 when I bought the A7iii. Had they not had the Sony 24-105 f2.8 I would have had to, imho, "downgrade" focal length wise to the Tamron. The only other option was the 24-70 f4 or the f2.8 version. The f2.8 was WAY over what I could have spent. And didn't care for the f4 because of reviews I've read. Hopefully Tamron gives us a Xmas present and confirms the rumors!!

Even if they did offer a Sony E-mount, for some reason it wouldn't have OSS! It seems the third-party lenses will do OSS for the Nikon and Canon versions but omit it for Sony. That fine if you own an a6500 or any of Sony's FF mirrorless cameras, as they all have IBIS but a5100, a6000 and a6300 owners get hosed! Worse yet, the Sony version of this lens would probably cost more than the Canon and Nikon versions, even though there wouldn't be the OSS mechanism built into the lens.

Which E-mount lens doesn't have OIS, but has on other mounts? Sigma just hasn't released any zoom for the E-mount yet. Not only the Batis line has OIS on Sony cameras, Tamron also makes a 18-200 for E-mount which has full VC.So there is no reason to believe future E-mount zooms by sigma won't support lens based OIS

if the extra weight is from optical complexity and a beefed up housing to contain it then yes ,maybe ,

popular photography magazine ,in "the used to be" [made with a substance called "paper "] reviewed a pseudo SLR camera from an ad and found it contained a billet of metal hidden in the base , presumably to suggest quality from weight to the otherwise clueless

Heavy lenses mean carrying many fewer lenses and only carrying premium lenses on pro shoots (I own three Sigma lenses and recently travelled with only my Canon lenses as otherwise my carry-on for transatlantic wouldn't be accepted). Very mixed feelings about the weight.

@cosinaphile That was the story of the recent "Yashica Y35" abomination. Two guys did a disassembly and found a couple of metal bars placed inside to create the impression of weight and therefore more solid construction. It was so horrible that it crossed over into hilarious right there. :)

the yashica debacle is the same sort of one the magazine exposed except with a nasty SLR shaped with a deceptive name like Nakon or something it was a hugeish slr hump affair meant to trick the uninitiated

Ah, good thing Sigma puts out an adapter for Sony that gives it full native features, including 10fps+ AF-C with tracking on the more recent cameras. As an added bonus, lens OS and body IBIS work in conjunction, unlike those lesser brands that artificially gimp their compatibility. ;)

Funny, because I use a lot of adapted lenses, and don't see that issue. Maybe the A6300 has the best AF of them all? ;)

And yes, DSLR lenses are cheaper, having been around for a couple of decades at this point. Faster to build up a collection of lenses that way, and replace them with better native ones as they're released/as you can afford them.

P: Native Z lenses will have advantages like for example IBIS etc...O: The lens is fully supported and will be fully functionalP: No it is not fully supported. Here look at this explanation from Nikons official websiteO: I don't believe you, I believe Rishi....

1. Rishi never said anything different2. I didn't say they wouldn't work. Obvioulsy the main functions work. I just said for the best experience native lenses are better for AF, stabilization and IQ

Native lenses will perform better is a different statement from adapted lenses will perform poor. Native lenses will perform better. That is all I am saying

At least we agree adapted telephoto zooms do not work well on Sony cameras.

Like Rishi showed, Sony cameras can't focus on objects outside the center of the frame with those lenses.

That's too bad because the Nikon z6 performs much better with adapted lenses.

Nothing comes close to a D500 or D5 though. DPR rightly named those the BEST cameras for sports and action. Best of all they have a superior lens selection too. (Sony action lens selection pretty much sucks, and as you said they fail with adapted lenses).

Yes, it has a killer feature. That's not the number of blades nor the complex optical build.The main feature of the lens is the extremely short way the zoom goes from 70 to 200mm. If i remember correctly, it is just a quarter turn from one end to the other.This has a very high practical use when shooting sports.

The Nikon E is a little under a quarter turn and turns easily with just one finger. If this would have come out back when the Nikon E did I'd probably be using all Sigma zooms today. As it is I've sold my Sigma Sports and went Nikon and Tamron just so I wouldn't have to use the inferior old Sigma 70-200mm and relearn which way to turn the zoom depending on what sport I'm covering.

At a higher price point than the Tamron G2, eh? It's at least certainly lower than the first party lenses, especially vs. the Nikon's latest version. I think the big differentiator between this and the Tamron will be how the lens behaves at close focus distances.

In terms of reproduction ratio, the Sigma wins by getting closer at a longer minimum focus distance. You also get an 11-blade aperture, 3 custom setting banks (customized by the USB Dock), and a custom button.

Well, remember now, Canikon also has their mirrorless cameras. Not a lens in sight for them. ;) Meanwhile, Sigma already has an adapter for Sony with full native features (yes, even at 10fps+ in AF-C + tracking ◔_◔ ), so it's not as high priority to have an E-mount version at launch as it is the other brands with single mount compatibility. At least for their mounts that sell well. ;)

Y'all are harsh. Seems like a head turner to me. Focus limiter, OIS modes, this provides a lot of horsepower. If it's just added weight as the trade-off for savings compared to first party lens, that alone is a big advantage (pun intended).

Well the fact is any modern lens made by one of the big players today is going to have IQ more than good enough for any real world photography use unless it is hit by some kind of widespread manufacturing anomaly. So really it will come down to brand preference, price, AF performance, and how much value you put on the Tamron's lighter weight. Personally I'd still get the cheaper, lighter, Tamron.

The argument was ridiculous, because the new lens is judged on the performance of a totally different focal length lens before the reviews are even out! The design requirements of a 70-200 is quite different. The argument showed ignorant prejudice and lack of an open mind. Is a lens guilty before proven innocent?

@adegroot. In pretty much all other brands like say Tamron, Canon, and Nikon for example the 24-70 f/2.8 lens are indeed very similar to the 70-200 f/2.8 lenses of the same generation for IQ and auto focus. So it is not unreasonable at all to use the the Sigma 24-70 as a starting place to guess at this lenses performance before we have any real reivews.

Where 've u been at for the past few years??? It's a Sigma, it's automatically better than everything else, you don't need no reviews for it. Just buy it, take a shot of your cat, post online and say it's unbelievable and waaay better than your Canon or NIKKOR that is less sharp and also focuses slower on your 450D/D90 ... du-uh?!?

Sigh. It's weighted 1805 g (3.98 lb), significantly heavier than Canon, Nikon and Sony versions. It seems Sigma never tried to learn how to optimize lens design on concern of weight and size without having to compromise optical quality. The reason I have not bought any Sigma Art lenses, mainly on their bulky design. In addition I doubt they will be sharper than Canon, Nikon and Sony OEM versions. No mention dual linear AF implementation in Sony FE 70-200 GM that makes it AF much faster in sport/wildlife/action type photos.

Tamrons new G2 70-200 F2.8 is great and lighter and 300$ cheaper. Older Nikon and Canon versions are availably and cheaper and lighter.

So the only people left are people that don't want to go with the great, cheap and light old native and tamron versions, which need better IQ than the Tamron G2, but don't have the funds for a new native lens. All that while not being concerned about weight.I don't know if that is enough.

Based on years observation. Such as on EF mount, Sigma lenses are good but not as good as Canon OEM lenses including respective 24-70 and 70-200 F2.8 zoom. They are cheaper and also pretty sharp but I cannot live with that significant extra weight that is a dealbreaker despite they are cheaper and optically also very good.

"In addition I doubt they will be sharper than Canon, Nikon and Sony OEM versions."---Why would you devalue your comment with such a statement.

This statement isn't that far fetched. Yes the Sigma Art primes are great, but mainly because they don't have competition in their DSLR mounts.

The new Canon 35mm F1.4 II for example is sharper than the Sigma Art 35mm. And the Nikon 105mm F1.4 is in many ways better than the Sigma Art 105mm F1.4And if you look at other mounts, lenses like the Zony 50mm F1.4 are also sharper.

But the even bigger problem here is that it is a zoom. Something Sigma is not known for in their Art series. The 24-70 F2.8 Sigma Art was a big disappointment. It wasn't as sharp as the native Canon and Sony lenses, and in many ways lost even to the Tamron 24-70 G2. And that while being much heavier.

So while it could be that this lens is great, all three big manufacturers, Sony, Nikon and Canon recently upgraded their 70-200 to top notch perfomance....

You have to transport the lens somehow, no? Why does it matter what PWP mentioned or not? When making a buying decision you have to think about how the lens will be used. I would rather pay $600 more than carry 400g more when travelling. Or don't pay more and get the Tamron.

Yes, i will buy a lighter lens, thank you very much.And it's called conversation, not whining. It's a forum. Go, buy your monopod and stop being so aggressive.

Well that's disappointing - I was hoping it'd be competitive with the Tamron G2. It'd better be really exceptional in some way to prove it's worth the extra cost - especially considering how low the Tamron goes for on sales!

- A more complex optical designBased on what? The Sigma has 22 elements, and the Tamron has 23 elements. That says nothing, but it is all we know so far

- 3 custom modes (most likely for individual AF speed, OS performance, and focus limiter settings)The Tamron also has a switch for 3 IS modes, and another for focus limiter settings. What do you use the AF speed switch for, without body support?

And you ignored the two big Tamron advantages.-300$ cheaper-400g lighter

@panther fan Exactly - it remains to be seen whether or not the Sigma will justify its extra cost and weight. The Tamron is generally recommended by reviewers as almost equal to Canon's 70-200 2.8, and so the Sigma is going to have exceed that very high bar. My guess is that it will be better than the Tamron in a number of ways, but unless that difference is significant indeed it will be hard to justify to the market its aiming for - budget minded photographers who might very decide to save several hundred dollars on a lens that's great versus one that does some things slightly better.

"- 3 custom modes (most likely for individual AF speed, OS performance, and focus limiter settings)The Tamron also has a switch for 3 IS modes, and another for focus limiter settings. What do you use the AF speed switch for, without body support?"

AF speed literally does what it says. You can increase the speed from how the lens ships for faster AF performance, or slow it down for video use for smooth focus transitions.

The custom OS type is different than what you usually get on-lens. The normal on-lens OS types are standard and panning. What these custom settings are for are changing the image projected through the viewfinder. You can change it to be heavily stabilized, good for video or very long focal lengths, or a more natural look, without the choppiness/juddering that happens when you go beyond the limits of stabilization.

What the custom modes do is let you set different configurations of AF speed, OS stabilization, and focus limiter settings via the USB Dock. You can then call them up at any time. For example, here are mine for the 150-600 C:

I could also do something like setting the limiter to 100m-infinity for shooting the moon or eclipses, or 1.5-100m for sports, to keep the lens from racking focus in unnecessary ranges. Plus, I can still change the on-lens OS type (standard/panning) while using these custom settings.

"- And you ignored the two big Tamron advantages.-300$ cheaper-400g lighter"

Because Tamron offers less features and a lesser optical design (as seen from Tamron's focus breathing issues).

I really like the idea of the customizable button but I'm not sure it'll be worth $200 more than my Tamron G2. However, if I shot Canon I guess the same rotation direction would be nice. I'm happy it has the built-in Arca-Swiss foot.

Latest in-depth reviews

The Canon G5 X Mark II earns a Silver Award with its very good image quality, flexibility and the overall engaging experience of using the camera. However, if you need the very best in autofocus and video, other options may suit you better. Find out all the details in our full G5 X II review.

360 photos and video can be very useful for certain applications (as well as having fun). The Vuze+ is an affordable 360 camera that supports both 2D and 3D (stereo vision) capture, and might be the best option for someone wanting to experiment with the 360 format.

The Mikme Pocket is a portable wireless mic with particular appeal to smartphone users looking to up their game and improve the quality of recorded audio without the cost or complexity or traditional equipment.

The 90D is essentially the DSLR version of the EOS M6 Mark II mirrorless camera that was introduced alongside it. Like the M6 II, it features a 32MP sensor, Dual Pixel AF, fast burst shooting and 4K/30p video capture. It will be available mid-September.

Latest buying guides

If you want a compact camera that produces great quality photos without the hassle of changing lenses, there are plenty of choices available for every budget. Read on to find out which portable enthusiast compacts are our favorites.

Whether you're hitting the beach in the Northern Hemisphere or the ski slopes in the Southern, a rugged compact camera makes a great companion. In this buying guide we've taken a look at nine current models and chosen our favorites.

What's the best camera for under $500? These entry level cameras should be easy to use, offer good image quality and easily connect with a smartphone for sharing. In this buying guide we've rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $500 and recommended the best.

If you're looking for a high-quality camera, you don't need to spend a ton of cash, nor do you need to buy the latest and greatest new product on the market. In our latest buying guide we've selected some cameras that while they're a bit older, still offer a lot of bang for the buck.

Whether you're new to the Micro Four Thirds system or a seasoned veteran, there are plenty of lenses available for you. We've used pretty much all of them, and in this guide we're giving your our recommendations for the best MFT lenses for various situations.

Blackmagic has announced an update to Blackmagic RAW that adds support, via plugins, to Adobe Premiere Pro and Avid Media Composer. Blackmagic also announced a pair of Video Assist 12G monitor-recorders with brighter HDR displays, USB-C recording and more.

Sony has announced the impending arrival of its next-generation video camera system, the FX9. The full-frame E-mount system is set to be released later this year with a 16-35mm E-mount lens to follow in spring 2020.

The Canon G5 X Mark II earns a Silver Award with its very good image quality, flexibility and the overall engaging experience of using the camera. However, if you need the very best in autofocus and video, other options may suit you better. Find out all the details in our full G5 X II review.

The Fujifilm X-A7 is the newest addition to the company's X-series lineup. Despite its relatively low price of $700 (with lens), Fujifilm didn't skimp on features. Click through to find out what you need to know about the X-A7.

The entry-level Fujifilm X-A7 improves upon many of its predecessor's weak points, including a zippier processor, an upgraded user experience and 4K/30p video capture. It goes on sale October 24th for $700 with a 15-45mm F3.5-5.6 kit lens.

Robert Frank's unconventional approach to photography and filmmaking defied generational constraints and inspired some of the most influential artists of the 20th century. He passed away today at age 94.

All three devices offer a standard 12MP camera plus, for the first time on an iPhone, an ultra-wide 13mm camera module. The 11 Pro and 11 Pro Max also retain the telephoto camera of previous generations.

Phase One's new XT camera system incorporates the company's IQ4 series of digital backs with up to 151MP of resolution and marries them to a line of Rodenstock lenses using the new XT camera body. The result is an impressively small package for one of the largest image sensors currently on the market - take a closer look here.

Phase One has announced its new XT camera system, which includes an IQ4 digital back, body (made up of a shutter release button and two dials) and a trio of Rodenstock lenses. The company is marketing the XT as a 'travel-friendly' product for landscape photographers.